the great Nibbana = annihilation, eternal, or something else thread

[Mahabrahma]

Everything that is Metta is infinite, meditate on that feeling.

Only evil is finite.

Therefore 1 + 1 = 2 = ∞, because there is no evil there. That is some esoteric math for you .

If you think about this, this is the basis for the formation of Loving form.

We are infinite beings.

[auto]

Everything that is Metta is infinite, meditate on that feeling.

Only evil is finite.

Therefore 1 + 1 = 2 = ∞, because there is no evil there. That is some esoteric math for you .

If you think about this, this is the basis for the formation of Loving form.

We are infinite beings.

Nibbana is absence of feeling. Imagine you endure something and it starts to disappear, it makes you feel good because of absence.

I have heard that on one occasion Ven. Sariputta was staying near Rajagaha in the Bamboo Grove, the Squirrels' Feeding Sanctuary. There he said to the monks, "This Unbinding is pleasant, friends. This Unbinding is pleasant."

When this was said, Ven. Udayin said to Ven. Sariputta, "But what is the pleasure here, my friend, where there is nothing felt?"

"Just that is the pleasure here, my friend: where there is nothing felt.

..

There are these five strings of sensuality. Which five? Forms cognizable via the eye — agreeable, pleasing, charming, endearing, fostering desire, enticing; sounds cognizable via the ear... smells cognizable via the nose... tastes cognizable via the tongue... tactile sensations cognizable via the body — agreeable, pleasing, charming, endearing, fostering desire, enticing. Whatever pleasure or joy arises in dependence on these five strings of sensuality, that is sensual pleasure.

when you are arousing loving feeling, that is sensual pleasure, which is object of the sense organ. It doesn't develop your mind, you need right intent for to develop mind. Mind needs to move(cittavimutti) in order to develop. When you are using a base or foundation/nimitta, which in your case is metta, is not nibbana(unconditional element), but it still potentially develops mind if there is right intent.

[cappuccino]

nibbana (unconditional element)

unconditioned element

[D1W1]

Hello,

Sorry to wake this thread up
I was about to create a new thread but think this could be related.
In Hinduism there is something eternal i.e. self. When one achieved moksha, consciousness is eternal. Siddharta Gautama was a Hindu but taught different concept of liberation, he was not satisfied with his teachers at that time. In Buddhism consciousness is not self, feeling is not self, all five aggregates are not self. So what attains permanent liberation? This lead to a view that Buddhism liberation is more extreme than Hinduism. Buddhism nirvana could be "higher" than Hinduism but what's left? We are told that we cannot know until we achieved it ourselves. But those who achieve it themselves, for example, the modern sages who are believed have attained nibbana do not talk much about what they have attained. Some of them talk a little bit about it but many said it's not in accordance with Buddhist teaching. For example if I am not mistaken Ajahn Chah and Ajahn Maha Boowa taught about eternalism or eternal mind/citta, this is similar to the teaching of Hindu. Although we can't experience nibbana ourselves, but at least there is something liberated or there is something who experience permanent peace. Do we, if not most Buddhists misunderstand Buddha or annihilation is the great liberation?

[cappuccino]

Do Buddhists misunderstand Buddha or annihilation is the great liberation?

Nirvana is "the final dimension"

There is that sphere where there is no earth, no water, no fire nor wind

[D1W1]

Do Buddhists misunderstand Buddha or annihilation is the great liberation?

Nirvana is "the final dimension"

There is that sphere where there is no earth, no water, no fire nor wind

Which is here and now and as Nagarjuna said Nibbana and Samsara are the same.

[cappuccino]

Which is here and now and as Nagarjuna said Nibbana and Samsara are the same.

No…

[SteRo]

Hello,

Sorry to wake this thread up
I was about to create a new thread but think this could be related.
In Hinduism there is ...

... Nagarjuna said ...

It seems you would have better opened another thread in another section of this forum because this section is about theravada not about comparison with other religions and Nagarjuna's views do not belong to the theravada either.

[Lucas Oliveira]

Sāriputta
Sāriputtasutta
AN 10.7

Ānanda asks Sāriputta about a mysterious state of immersion in meditation where there is no normal perception, yet one is still conscious. Sāriputta confirms that there is, and claims to have attained it.

Numbered Discourses 10
1. Benefits

7. Sāriputta

Then Venerable Ānanda went up to Venerable Sāriputta, and exchanged greetings with him. When the greetings and polite conversation were over, he sat down to one side and said to Sāriputta:

“Could it be, reverend Sāriputta, that a mendicant might gain a state of immersion like this? They wouldn’t perceive earth in earth, water in water, fire in fire, or air in air. And they wouldn’t perceive the dimension of infinite space in the dimension of infinite space, the dimension of infinite consciousness in the dimension of infinite consciousness, the dimension of nothingness in the dimension of nothingness, or the dimension of neither perception nor non-perception in the dimension of neither perception nor non-perception. And they wouldn’t perceive this world in this world, or the other world in the other world. And yet they would still perceive.”

“It could be, Reverend Ānanda.”

“But how could this be?”

“Reverend Ānanda, one time I was staying right here at Sāvatthī in the Dark Forest. There I gained a state of immersion like this. I didn’t perceive earth in earth, water in water, fire in fire, or air in air. And I didn’t perceive the dimension of infinite space in the dimension of infinite space, the dimension of infinite consciousness in the dimension of infinite consciousness, the dimension of nothingness in the dimension of nothingness, or the dimension of neither perception nor non-perception in the dimension of neither perception nor non-perception. And I didn’t perceive this world in this world, or the other world in the other world. And yet I still perceived.”

“But at that time what did Reverend Sāriputta perceive?”

“One perception arose in me and another perception ceased: ‘The cessation of continued existence is extinguishment. The cessation of continued existence is extinguishment.’ Suppose there was a burning pile of twigs. One flame would arise and another would cease. In the same way, one perception arose in me and another perception ceased: ‘The cessation of continued existence is extinguishment. The cessation of continued existence is extinguishment.’ At that time I perceived that the cessation of continued existence is extinguishment.”

https://suttacentral.net/an10.7/en/sujato

[mjaviem]

In my flawed view, I think:

• There is the world out there (trees, rivers, clouds, wind, animals, humans, cities, stars, etc.), all ending some day.
• There are this mortal body and perishable forms, these fleeting sensations, these disrupted perceptions and changing mental activity. And there is consciousness of some of this, sometimes.
• There is this clinging to some or all above (aggregates & the world). This sets us apart from the world dividing what's us and our stuffs from the rest. And there's this craving to turn all this our way and to make all our own.
• There is something eternal, not depending on any conditions.

When we die I think there is no more us but still there is others, other selves and new ones coming to existence, there and then.

And if we awaken, again, there is no more us. Our selves are annhilated yes, the annhilation is of something unsubstancial so nothing really annhilated there, yes. And what is left after death in this case is also something eternal yes, that that was obscured to us before enlightenment with suffering and turbulence. And something impermanent is also left too, that world that is out there.

[cappuccino]

In my flawed view, I think:

are you not Buddhist?


just agree with Buddha

[mjaviem]

In my flawed view, I think:

are you not Buddhist?


just agree with Buddha

I'm trying to learn and follow the Buddha's advice. Not sure if I'm buddhist, though.

In what evident way do I disagree with the Buddha?

[cappuccino]

In what evident way do I disagree with the Buddha?

you are not quoting scripture

[mjaviem]

In what evident way do I disagree with the Buddha?

you are not quoting scripture

Oh. I see. Guilty. Yes, not quoting any Sutta, just sharing the twisted view I have so far concerning this thread's topic.

Could you quote a Sutta that you consider is in opposition to what I said so I can correct my view? ( Not kidding, That could help me improve my understanding).

[cappuccino]

Could you quote a Sutta … so I can correct my view?

I recollected my manifold past lives, i.e., one birth, two...five, ten...fifty, a hundred, a thousand, a hundred thousand, many eons of cosmic contraction, many eons of cosmic expansion, many eons of cosmic contraction & expansion: 'There I had such a name, belonged to such a clan, had such an appearance. Such was my food, such my experience of pleasure & pain, such the end of my life. Passing away from that state, I re-arose there.


Maha-Saccaka Sutta